JosephH

Out of the CCU and in LAX on my way home... Good going to you guys! I got in two full moon [roped] solos of YW this summer. I love being out there in the full moon - the whole place lights up so well I only need the headlamp at two brief spots on YW (in the Butthole and lower p3). I'd throw a squawking cat in with Bill's dogs...

am in LA and inadvertently wired up in a cardio unit near my conference with a dying cell - can't read or respond to pm's as the dropdown doesn't work on my phone. Will when out...

Which part of Jill's - below or above the rap...?

Good job Ivan! I can't believe I'm out of town on such a nice weekend...damn it!

The majority opinion in Gore v. Bush - it doesn't get any more activist (and anti-states rights) than that. Except possibly Roberts and Alito - two of the most activist judges ever appointed to SCOTUS and both staunch supporters of the Yoo Doctrine and unitary executive. In fact, it's not in any way a stretch to say they were both nominated solely because of their beliefs with regard to a unitary executive - something which could also backfire on the right. Two more appointments in their mold would pose a greater threat to our freedom than any external foe. Also, as a side note, many conservative legal scholars are now calling Heller a mistake because the individual rights logic employed by the majority will likely now bleed over to protect Roe (yes, even despite the fact the founders made no mention of abortion...).

Bill, I think in the end, for the whole guns-for-rights vs. guns-for-self-defense argument to be legitimate it has to be grounded in some remotely plausible mechanism or scenario for private weapons being used effectively against our government. And by that I mean in today's world, not 225 years ago. I just can't for the life of me envision a single scenario in today's America (regardless whether the setting is rural, suburban, or urban) where private weapons could be employed to effectively prevent or counter an out-of-control, dictatorial Executive. And as others have stated elsewhere in the thread, we've seen a deliberate and systematic attack on the balance of power as designed by our founders. Formerly-young Nixon and Reaganites, using John Yoo's 'doctrine' claiming unlimited and unrestrainable power of a unitary Executive have been the greatest threat to America since the South's succession from the Union in the civil war. What has flowed from that [Yoo] doctrine of an unlimited power of the Executive has been illegal wiretaps, illegal search and siezure of records (FBI 'Security Letters'), torture, rendition, a suspension of Habeas Corpus, and several attempts to eliminate or weaken the protection against the domestic use of the military as provided by the Posse Comitatus and the Insurrection Acts. Add to that this President's use of 'Signgin Statements' when signing legislation whereby the he claims [again and again] that the legislation 'signed', either whole or in part, is merely advisory relative to the President versus the law of the land and you have a frighteningly slippery slope to exactly the scenarios you claim to fear. In fact, Bush has used Executive signing statements more times than all the Presidents before him combined. At no time during the past eight years have gun owners, as a group, raised so much as a peep against those deliberate abuses. The Neocon's relentless attacks on the Constitution and Bill of Rights has not been resisted by the NRA or gun owners as a political group, but rather supported at every turn. I personally am not quite sure what to even make of it - gun owners as a group supporting the most systematic assault on the Constitution the nation has ever seen. What am I supposed to make of it other than to assume the majority of gun owners have to-date proven themselves part and parcel with attempts to overthrow the balance of powers so carefully designed by our Founders. It's really hard to come to any other conclusion but that gun owners as a class are easily manipulated and would likely be on the frontlines of any attempt by a nationalist, dictatorial Exective to sieze our government - and not on our side, but rather on the side of those siezing the government. If anyone thinks that's unlikely, think again, that's is exactly the scenario that played out in Yugoslavia/Serbia.

Actually, Bill did serve in the military. But I believe such things as a replay of the internment camps of WWII is not at all out of the question even for 'normal' Americans under the right circumstances. Divisiveness is not hard to take out to extremes and in that atmosphere have 'average' citizens responsible for inhuman behavior. Hell, swap an epidemic for politics and you'd see some pretty drastic and ugly behavioral changes overnight.

Well, if Palin follows in Cheney's boot prints, then if I were her friends I'd be very nervous whenever she's packing heat. She looks like a 12 gauge girl...

I don't know, I climb throughout the winter right up until the Feb 1st closure. Most of those days are screaming east winds that blow you off your stance up on the corner ridge. Not sure I've noticed any more rockfall. This year, though, we've had fairly steady rockfall from what I'm guessing is more or less the same spot up there.

Hmmm, there's still loose stuff coming down. I'm guessing it's all coming from one as yet unidentified spot up on that last, high wall. Bummer we can't seem to identify the source.

Would love to, but I'm leaving for LA in the morning - hopefully someone here can oblige you...

I look to Yugoslavia as a role model for the potential with them. I worry far, far more about an ultra-nationalist administration using fear to 'deputize' my neighbors with guns to provide for 'law and order' and 'community policing'. Extend the tactics and intent of this administration out not all that far and back it up with two more wack jobs on SCOTUS and you have a far scarier potential for a rightwing take over of the country - and one that would likely be supported by the NRA than opposed by it.

82nd Airborne against PDX's SE 82nd street - admittedly a tough call, and god only knows which has more firepower...

I would then, be curious how you envision citizens with guns would in any way counter a shift in the balance of power? Again, two more SCOTUS seats filled with people who believe in more power for the Executive is exactly the scenario you should fear if it really is all about 'balance of power' for you. McCain's vowed appointments would vastly upset the balance of power set forth by the founding fathers.

Bill, don't in any way think I believe there isn't a legitimate right to gun ownership for self-defense - I do. I simply have a hard time swallowing any form of modern day militia defending the Constitution against a would-be dictator. As far as Obama's word goes - he was in no way my first choice for a candidate. I am from Chicago and know exactly what that means for someone to come up through those local politics, even if managing to bypass much of it. In fact, if it weren't for the two SCOTUS seats up for grab I almost wouldn't care who's President so long as the Congress is Democratic. But with two SCOTUS seats on the table, and McCain's vow to appoint yet more radically activist judges who would likely further support an even more imperial Executive, I find the prospect of him being elected not only problematic, but untenable for the future of our nation and our freedoms. Him filling two more SCOTUS seats with the likes of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas would be the surest way to the possibility of you needing arms to defend yourself against the government.

Bill, I think that worked for us in the earlier days of our nation, but has long since faded into our own cultural identity, legend, and mythology. Our nation is now built on system of highly distributed resources such that there are so many better and eaiser ways to abbrogate our freedoms than the use of overt force. We've just seen over the past eight years that it only takes a few words and penstrokes to abridge, corrode, and corrupt the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The image of my neighbors held up in the local McDonalds with a generator attempting to hold off the Army, or storming the Federal building downtown, are certainly strong images, but I fear the majority of Americans, gun owners included, would quickly submit to much simpler and effective internal assaults on the nation. Nothing about Americans owning guns stopped the Neocons from all but destroying the country and I didn't see any guns in the street in an attempt to prevent them from taking a solid run at many of our freedoms. I guess I simply have a very hard time seeing how private weapons would be organized or effectively employed in any form of 'militia' such that it would be a significant threat to an administration even more corrupt than this one. Personally, I think McCain, and particularly his wife, have thrown so much of his integrity over the transom of the straight talk express in their bid for power that I have no doubt they'd do the same to all of you gun owners to keep it.

Also, I didn't 'create' the rock or the line, we're just trying to climb it. This isn't the sort of route that could ever be made 'safe' by any means. Even if you bolted the shit out of it there are still too many big loose blocks and just tracking out right along the edge over space has lots of serious logistical implications with a second not making the roof and, in general, it's not a route that will be easy to retreat from above the roof. We've been saying it's a route where you really have to want to be up in that part of Beacon to do p2 - which is a great line in and of itself, even if you don't go any further - and you really have to want that roof and the wall above to leave the p3 anchor. Nothing about the route is 'normal' or ever will be by any means.

And Shane... And anyone else excited at the prospect of heading through that big roof.

The middle of the band of rock from the anchor up to the base of the roof is more like bad Smith tuft than Beacon basalt. The pro is a bit marginal and the moves are hard and awkward. A fall might or might not rip one, some, or I suppose even all the placements before you are up under the roof to a Super Cam placement. Let's put it this way, the first piece off the anchor is a beak, the second piece is an HB #7 alloy buried behind the top of a 12' x 4>1' x 2>1' slightly expanding block, the third is a somewhat dubious nest of a #00, #0, and #1 cams, the fourth is a mostly sunk soft euro spade in a crumbling dihedral, the fifth a #1 cam in a runny slot, the sixth an HB #11 alloy slotted backwards in a three-way intersection but a third out of the slot. At that point you go up another 15' to get solid pro and a lousy 'rest', before establishing good pro at the start of the roof and heading up and out. We've fallen on pieces above the Super Cam in the roof (I took a 40-50 footer from out at the lip which was almost clean), but never on any of the pro in the fifty to sixty feet to the solid pro just below the roof. And because you've been travelling out right as you go up and progressively more out over space, on that approach section you'd fall clean at first, but at some point are going to go whipping back left towards the anchor or the long dihedral below it if much of that stuff pulled. The anchor is bomb, however, as are the pitches below and the rock from the roof to the top - it's just this one band that is a bit sketch.

Thanks. I get the nervous sweats just thinking about going back up. We have p3 up to the roof basically under control, just so long as we get back on it soon.

So is most of Beacon. You're not going to get an argument from me...

It is a bit of a sandbag at 10b - clearly a 10c...

I started on the one that goes slightly left and straight up instead of going onto the party ledge as you're heading up the last few moves up to it. Has a shrubbery in the middle of it that would need to be cleaned out. Nice moves up to and through the same sort of 'pod' as the lower one on Riverside.

Ha, good for you Ivan. Hanmi and Jim Meyer climbed it Sunday as well. Jim and I ended up giving it a whirl on a lark Saturday (after deciding against LW), but I backed off of it as we didn't have the requisite small gear. I meant to get back up on it Sunday as well, but Rhoda and I ended up hiking Hamilton instead. Jim and Hanmi did end up going back up and getting the job done, so it was clearly a big day for Riverside. Next time I'm out I'll be getting back on it and replacing the anchor. Riverside should see way more traffic than it does...

That was Jim Meyer and I up on Upper Grassy Ledges - didn't feel any LW mojo today when I got there and the sun wasn't out, we had a pretty good time all in all though.